MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Utility of Ki67 immunostaining in the grading of pineal parenchymal tumours: a multicentre study

2011· article· en· W1591450765 on OpenAlex
M. Fèvre‐Montange, Alexandre Vasiljevic, Didier Frappaz, Jacques Champier, Alexandru Szathmári, Marie‐Hélène Lorton, F. Chapon, A. Coulon, Isabelle Quintin Roué, Marie Bernadette Delisle, Dominique Figarella‐Branger, A. Laquérrière, Catherine Miquel, Jean‐François Michiels, Michel Péoc’h, M. Polivka, F. Fauchon, Anne Jouvet

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropathology and Applied Neurobiology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlioma Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsSte. Anne's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrading (engineering)ImmunostainingMedicinePathologyNeuropathologyRetrospective cohort studyImmunohistochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

M. Fèvre‐Montange, A. Vasiljevic, D. Frappaz, J. Champier, A. Szathmari, M.‐H. Aubriot Lorton, F. Chapon, A. Coulon, I. Quintin Roué, M.‐B. Delisle, D. Figarella‐Branger, A. Laquerrière, C. Miquel, J.‐F. Michiels, M. Péoch, M. Polivka, F. Fauchon and A. Jouvet (2012) Neuropathology and Applied Neurobiology 38, 87–94 Utility of Ki67 immunostaining in the grading of pineal parenchymal tumours: a multicentre study Aims: Pineal parenchymal tumours (PPTs) are rare neoplasms that are divided into pineocytoma (PC), pineoblastoma (PB) and PPT of intermediate differentiation (PPTID). Factors affecting the survival of patients with PPTs are morphological subtype and histological grading according to mitotic index and neurofilament immunostaining. Grading criteria to distinguish PPTIDs are difficult to define, particularly when using small specimens. The Ki67 labelling index (LI) might be helpful in distinguishing between grade II and III PPTIDs. Our study was performed to assess the predictive value of the Ki67 LI in a large cooperative series of PPTs and to evaluate whether inclusion of this data would improve and refine the World Health Organization classification. Methods: A retrospective analysis of 33 PPTs was performed. The histological features of the tumours were reviewed and Ki67 LI scoring was evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Data were correlated with the patients' survival. Results: The mean Ki67 LI was significantly different for tumour grades (0 in PC, 5.2 ± 0.4 in PPTID grade II, 11.2 ± 2.0 in PPTID grade III, 36.4 ± 6.2 in PB; P < 0.0001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in either overall or disease‐free survival evaluated by the Kaplan–Meier method for patients with different grade tumours or Ki67 LI, possibly due to the different clinical management of patients in different centres. Conclusions: The Ki67 LI may be a useful additional tool for grading PPTs, more particularly in small tumour samples.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.404

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it